I can't stomach the idea of condemning the act of inviting people to an event for which they have to pay for admission as rude. I feel that as long as the costs are clearly presented up front, those invited can make an informed decision about whether to attend.

And by up front, I mean in the same breath (or paragraph) as the invitation.

For example, "Hey guys, I was thinking it'd be fun to go to the Twins game next Saturday. Tickets are $20/person, and I was thinking we could all get seats in section X. Interested?"

In this situation, the person would be an organizer, rather than a host.

That sounds like some friends getting together. My friends and I plan outings like this. The invite should have said "hey, it's my birthday! If anyone wants to join me, I am going to Laser Tag Emporium. It is $30 if you want to play." Instead OP get's an invitation that basically boils down to say "I wanted a birthday party my parents could not afford, so instead of telling me no and teaching me the value of a dollar, we decided to have you subsidize my party. Don't forget your wallet and my gift"

I can't stomach the idea of condemning the act of inviting people to an event for which they have to pay for admission as rude. I feel that as long as the costs are clearly presented up front, those invited can make an informed decision about whether to attend.

And by up front, I mean in the same breath (or paragraph) as the invitation.

For example, "Hey guys, I was thinking it'd be fun to go to the Twins game next Saturday. Tickets are $20/person, and I was thinking we could all get seats in section X. Interested?"

In this situation, the person would be an organizer, rather than a host.

I think that's totally fine. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. Right others?

I think it's the "Hey guys, let's go to the Twins game next Saturday. I got great seats behind home plate." And then after they say yes, you say "Hey, can you drive? I don't like driving my car in big cities." Then, you don't offer to pay for parking. And then after they acquiesce and you're on your 3rd beer in the 9th inning, you say "Oh, btw, the tickets were normally $100 apiece. I got them for a discount, so you only owe me $80. And the hot dogs were $5 each."

MANY things are more affordable if you can talk others in to defraying some or all of your costs! The important thing, though, is to be upfront about it, and not pull the bait and switch that is happening here. It's ALL in how it's handled from the start.

Logged

Newly widowed, fairly cranky, prone to crying at the drop of a hat. Newly a MIL; not yet a Grandma. Keeper of chickens and dispenser of eggs! Owner of Lard Butt Noelle, kitteh extraordinaire!

Some things are more affordable and more enjoyable if you divide the costs. Like yum cha, which can be rather expensive if you don't go in a group.

Yes, like lobster. However, if you invite people to your place for supper, and then expect them to pay for the food you put on their plates, you are not a host, you are a restaurant manager.

Logged

My cousin's memoir of love and loneliness while raising a child with multiple disabilities will be out on Amazon soon! Know the Night, by Maria Mutch, has been called "full of hope, light, and companionship for surviving the small hours of the night."

I had an interesting conversation with my husband a few days ago. We are throwing a 6th BD party for our twin girls at The Little Gym. (We had accumulated enough points on a rewards card to get the party free:-)) He asked me if we were paying for all the children.* With big eyes I replied, "Of course!!! You don't invite people to a party and ask them to pay!!!" I was horrified. He looked taken back and said with indigence, "Well, I don't know!" *he doesn't also retain information I give him like "we are getting this party for free:-))"

My husband is the sweetest, kindest, gentlest guy ever and when people are over to our house he is the most gracious host. When we go out with friends or family, he often wants us to pick up the tab, especially with friends or family members that we know have less than we do. But, he's never thrown a kid's BD party at a location where we had to pay. And I guess he had assumed that I was paying for the girls when we went to other parties. He simply didn't know. There was no malice or cheapness intended when he asked me the question; he just didn't know any better.

So, I'm hoping that parents who do throw parties and ask their guests to pay just don't know any better. Maybe this is the party their kid really, really wants and they just don't want to say no.

That said, I probably wouldn't go to a party where I had to pay for my girls to go. Especially one that would cost around $45 once you factor in a gift. I would consider letting my girls go to say, a day at Kings Dominion, with a very best friend. But it would be a special circumstance.

When it comes to adult parties, I would be less a stickler about a group getting together for dinner to celebrate the birthday person. In that situation, I would assume I was paying for my own dinner and would be happy to chip in for the BD person's dinner. If it wasn't a place I could afford to go, then I would decline. I have fewer issues with this because I think it's fine for adults to want to get together with their friends on their BD and unreasonable to expect most people to be able to pay for everyone's dinner - even at a cheap place.

*edited to add - *I wouldn't condone parents throwing parties and asking people to pay, I'm just hoping that in most cases it's ignorance at play instead of cheapness or rudeness.

Back on topic: charging people to attend a party/event is unacceptable.

OTOH I might have broken my own rule. DH (Mr. Bean) and I were married in 2011. We invited only immediate family and very close friends (about 20 people in all including ourselves) It was a destination wedding in the Florida Keys. We wanted to help our guests and opted to rent out three vacation rentals (nine bedrooms total) so that they had free hotel rooms during the visit. The place also had two pools and a private beach so that was a nice perk. We couldn't afford our guests' airfare however (although we did have to cover my mother's airfare as she waited until TWO WEEKS before the wedding to buy tickets and then pulled the "I can't afford to come so if you want MOB there, you'll have to pay up!" Cue the guilt trip!!!

I don't consider holding a person responsible for their own transportation to an event "charging" them to attend though. Similar to OSUJellyBean and Mr. Bean, my fiancÚ and I have decided to rent accommodations for our family for our upcoming wedding. We have a 6 bedroom beach house reserved for a week, and have let our parents, grandparents, and siblings (plus their spouses and children) know that they are welcome to stay for as much or as little of the week as they want. We are hosting all meals and snacks the day of our wedding. The other 6 days though, meals are going to be fend for yourself. And everyone is responsible for getting to/from the location themselves, which will be a 500 - 1200 mile trip, each way, for 11 of our 13 guests. It isn't a destination wedding, we just happened to have moved away from our family, but the end result is that it's still a destination for our guests.

Especially with weddings, more often than not someone is going to have to come from some distance away to be there. I have drive over 600 miles for my cousin's wedding (in her hometown), and flown over 1000 miles for my brother's wedding (in our home state). When I got married the first time, the wedding was held in my hometown, a 1000+ mile trip for my ex-husband's family and our college friends, and a 500+ mile trip for all of my family except for my parents and siblings. As long as the guests are well-fed and don't have to pony up for a non-alcoholic beverage, I don't think anyone would ever think a wedding wasn't fully hosted just because the happy couple didn't fly them in for the event.

So, I'm hoping that parents who do throw parties and ask their guests to pay just don't know any better. Maybe this is the party their kid really, really wants and they just don't want to say no.

While I've read this thread and can't add a single useful or original thought to what everyone has said, I wanted to say I really appreciate it when I see others trying to give people the benefit of the doubt. I agree, I hope they just don't know better and want to provide for their children the party they really want.

I thought about this thread today. A family friend is having a joint birthday party for all 5 of her kids and she's having it at a particular park that's got a county run water park inside it. Now, we could go to the regular part of the park, have the party and leave, but she's planning on having her kids go to the water park part. There's an admission fee for the water park. If I was throwing the party, I'd have only invited those whom I could afford to pay for. I guess she's trying to skirt paying for people by saying the party is really outside of the water park, but that's pretty mean to the kids who's parents can't afford to pay for admission to the water park.

Logged

Some people lift weights. I lift measures. It's a far more esoteric workout. - (Quoted from a personal friend)

I thought about this thread today. A family friend is having a joint birthday party for all 5 of her kids and she's having it at a particular park that's got a county run water park inside it. Now, we could go to the regular part of the park, have the party and leave, but she's planning on having her kids go to the water park part. There's an admission fee for the water park. If I was throwing the party, I'd have only invited those whom I could afford to pay for. I guess she's trying to skirt paying for people by saying the party is really outside of the water park, but that's pretty mean to the kids who's parents can't afford to pay for admission to the water park.

Wait, so she is inviting everyone to a park for a party. At some time during the party, her kids who are the GOH will leave their guests and go to the water park? What does she think will happen to the guests who are left behind? That they will just hang around and wait till the birthday kids return?

Or is it, "We are going to have a 2 hour birthday party at park. AFTER the party, my kids plan to go to the water park if anyone is interested in going too."

Honestly, I think both are a a really bad idea but at least the 2nd isn't so in your face your excluded.

It's option 1. She's planning on having a picnic lunch, sending the kids to the water park, then a couple hours later do the cake and ice cream thing.

Wow that's just... seriously? I'd decline. Unbelievable. I bet a lot of kids leave when her kids take off for those few hours. She'll probably be whining how rude everyone was to leave.

Edited because I can't get over this and I have more questions. lol

Did she make it really, really clear what her plan is? I'd be concerned that a lot of the kids will be dropped off with the parents assuming the water park deal is either everyone or nobody. I foresee a number of upset kids calling their parents "My friends went swimming. Can you please bring me some money/pick me up now?"

Man I hope none of the kids whose parents can't afford to pay for swimming get dropped off to sit and wait alone. Is she at least planning some activities and supervision for them while her kids are swimming?

I can't stomach the idea of condemning the act of inviting people to an event for which they have to pay for admission as rude. I feel that as long as the costs are clearly presented up front, those invited can make an informed decision about whether to attend.

And by up front, I mean in the same breath (or paragraph) as the invitation.

For example, "Hey guys, I was thinking it'd be fun to go to the Twins game next Saturday. Tickets are $20/person, and I was thinking we could all get seats in section X. Interested?"

In this situation, the person would be an organizer, rather than a host.

I think that's totally fine. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. Right others?

I think it's the "Hey guys, let's go to the Twins game next Saturday. I got great seats behind home plate." And then after they say yes, you say "Hey, can you drive? I don't like driving my car in big cities." Then, you don't offer to pay for parking. And then after they acquiesce and you're on your 3rd beer in the 9th inning, you say "Oh, btw, the tickets were normally $100 apiece. I got them for a discount, so you only owe me $80. And the hot dogs were $5 each."

I can't stomach the idea of condemning the act of inviting people to an event for which they have to pay for admission as rude. I feel that as long as the costs are clearly presented up front, those invited can make an informed decision about whether to attend.

And by up front, I mean in the same breath (or paragraph) as the invitation.

For example, "Hey guys, I was thinking it'd be fun to go to the Twins game next Saturday. Tickets are $20/person, and I was thinking we could all get seats in section X. Interested?"

In this situation, the person would be an organizer, rather than a host.

I think that's totally fine. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. Right others?

I think it's the "Hey guys, let's go to the Twins game next Saturday. I got great seats behind home plate." And then after they say yes, you say "Hey, can you drive? I don't like driving my car in big cities." Then, you don't offer to pay for parking. And then after they acquiesce and you're on your 3rd beer in the 9th inning, you say "Oh, btw, the tickets were normally $100 apiece. I got them for a discount, so you only owe me $80. And the hot dogs were $5 each."

It looks like the other thread (the link above) is about throwing oneself a party. So there's a "guest of honor" and I could see how it would not be universally agreed upon. I thought what MrTango was talking about was more of one person (so, an organizer, but not a guest of honor) saying "Hey, other friends, let's all do this event together."